Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:41:42 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@gmail.com> Subject: Re: NetBSD 5.0 statistics Message-ID: <78367CB5-7DAD-4DB1-99DA-2618CFACF376@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904302030520.8997@fledge.watson.org> References: <6101e8c40904300750i3e86fc0cnef09b0d4533627f7@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904302030520.8997@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Apr 30, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Oliver Pinter wrote: > >> Is the FreeBSD's FS management so slow? >> >> http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html >> >> Or so big is the difference between the two cpu scheduler? > > Also, there's a known and serious performance regression in CAM > relating to tgged queueing, and the generic disk sort routine, > introduced 7.1, which will be fixed in 7.2. I can't speak more > generally to the benchmarks -- we'll need to run them in a > controlled environment and see if we can reproduce the results. Also :-) I recall that our "make -j X" actually limits the number of make processes/jobs to X. I don't know anything about build.sh, so I don't know if our make is at all being involved, but it would be good to know how the load varies per OS. We may simply have less parallelism in the build. -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?78367CB5-7DAD-4DB1-99DA-2618CFACF376>